Hiya LND Builders and Neighborhood,
I am dealing with a extremely uncommon and important subject the place on-chain funds related to a previous LND channel closure are inaccessible, regardless of my Bitcoin Core node (v29.0.0, RPi5, totally synced after recent IBD, txindex=1) confirming the UTXO’s existence through scantxoutset. Nonetheless, each listunspent and exterior pockets software program (Sparrow) fail to notice this UTXO, and crucially, the tackle holding the funds can’t be derived from my LND root key utilizing commonplace strategies.
System & Historical past:
LND: v0.18.5-beta (upgraded from v0.5.2-beta). Confirmed just one pockets.db used all through.
Bitcoin Core: v29.0.0 (RPi5), totally synced post-IBD, txindex=1 stories synced: true. Datadir /mnt/hdd/bitcoin.
Channel Historical past: Opened Mar 2019 (LND v0.5.2, Funding Tx: 7060…9d71), later force-closed by peer.
Sweep Transaction: On Apr 1, 2024 (Block 837257), Tx 4c0407b1188e0ba39313b1d9c87c49f6c81d99aa2839026c8af8c989ce102244 spent the channel output, sending ~0.01495 BTC to P2WPKH tackle bc1qt728qplpuh6d98evkl4a990zdhwpwvur6qg8qz.
On-Chain Verification: Explorers verify this UTXO (4c04…:0) exists and is unspent at bc1qt7…g8qz.
The Core Downside & Contradictions:
After a full IBD and guaranteeing txindex is synced on my Bitcoin Core node:
getrawtransaction 4c04... true SUCCEEDS: The node is aware of the historical past of the funding transaction.
scantxoutset begin '["addr(bc1qt7...)"]' SUCCEEDS and RETURNS THE UTXO: This straight confirms that the node’s chainstate (UTXO set) database IS CORRECT and incorporates the unspent output for bc1qt7…g8qz.
{
"success": true, ...
"unspents": [ { "txid": "4c04...", "vout": 0, ... "address": "bc1qt7...", "amount": 0.01495437 ... } ],
"total_amount": 0.01495437
}
listunspent ... '["bc1qt7..."]' (utilizing -rpcwallet="" or different loaded wallets) returns []: Regardless of the UTXO current within the chainstate, the wallet-specific RPC name fails to record it.
Sparrow Pockets (recent set up, related to this node) reveals 0 steadiness: When importing the confirmed LND root xprv and configuring for BIP84 (m/84’/0’/0′, Native Segwit P2WPKH), Sparrow completes scanning however reveals 0 steadiness and lists no UTXOs, failing to see the UTXO that the node is aware of exists (per scantxoutset).
Parallel Pockets Derivation Failure:
Utilizing the confirmed root xprv (extracted from the right pockets.db through chantools showrootkey), in depth checks with offline instruments (bip39-standalone.html) on commonplace BIP84 paths (m/84’/0’/0’/0/* and m/84’/0’/0’/1/*) did not derive the tackle bc1qt728qplpuh6d98evkl4a990zdhwpwvur6qg8qz after checking thousands and thousands of addresses.
Present Standing & Pressing Questions:
I’ve on-chain funds at bc1qt7…g8qz that my node essentially is aware of about (per scantxoutset), however that are inaccessible through commonplace pockets RPCs (listunspent) and exterior wallets (Sparrow). Compounding that is the failure to derive this particular tackle from the LND root key utilizing commonplace BIP84 paths.
Searching for skilled assistance on:
Why would listunspent (even with the right pockets specified) and exterior wallets like Sparrow fail to notice a UTXO when scantxoutset on the identical node confirms its existence within the UTXO set? Is that this a identified Core bug, a problem with how wallets question non-owned addresses, or one thing else?
Given the derivation failure, is it attainable for LND (esp. after main model jumps) to brush funds to an tackle not derivable through commonplace BIP84 paths from the aezeed root key? May a bug or particular state result in utilizing a special derivation scheme or perhaps a key unrelated to the principle pockets for sweep outputs?
Are there any superior strategies or instruments (LND debug instructions, particular chantools utilization, various pockets software program identified to deal with edge instances) that might both:
a) Power Sparrow/LND to acknowledge the UTXO primarily based on the node’s chainstate affirmation?
b) Assist definitively hint the derivation path (even when non-standard) used to generate bc1qt7…g8qz from my pockets.db/xprv?
This case appears extremely anomalous. Any insights or steering could be extraordinarily appreciated.
Thanks.
